Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Breast Cancer / September 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Negative  Effect of Povidone Iodine on Silicone Gel Breast Implants

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Ilena Rose - 30 Aug 2004 20:35 GMT

~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
amongst the garbage posted here.

Reminds me of the years and years the PS's broke up the protective
capsules ... injuring the women and the implants. ~~~~

http://highwire.stanford.edu/cgi/medline/pmid;15318049

George J. Zambacos, Dai Nguyen, and Robert J. Morris Effect of
Povidone Iodine on Silicone Gel Breast Implants In Vitro: Implications
for Clinical Practice. Plast Reconstr Surg, September 1, 2004; 114(3):
706-710.

Plymouth, United Kingdom; From the Department of Plastic and
Reconstructive Surgery, Derriford Hospital.

Irrigation of breast implants and breast implant pockets with various
solutions, including povidone iodine, has been a common practice among
plastic surgeons for many years. Recent reports of potential weakening
of silicone tubing have led the Food and Drug Administration to
pronounce any contact of povidone iodine with breast implants a
contraindication. An in vitro experimental study was undertaken to
assess the effect of povidone iodine on the physical properties of
silicone breast implant shells. Identical specimens were obtained from
the shells of silicone breast implants according to published
standards. The specimens were randomly assigned to eight groups of
five and incubated in various solutions of decreasing concentration of
povidone iodine (10% to 0.01%), and a control group (0.9% saline) was
used. The containers were stored in a warming cabinet at 37°C for 4
weeks. Testing of the specimens for tensile strength following 4 weeks
of incubation showed no significant difference among any of the
groups, including the control group. In addition, no correlation was
shown between the concentration of the solution used and the tensile
strength of the specimens.

PMID: 15318049  

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For more on the very real risks of breast implants ... please visit:

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org
Mary Fisher - 04 Sep 2004 23:25 GMT
> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
> amongst the garbage posted here.

Can I ask which newsgroup you think posts garbage?

Mary
Ilena Rose - 04 Sep 2004 23:39 GMT
>> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
>> amongst the garbage posted here.
>
>Can I ask which newsgroup you think posts garbage?
>
>Mary

alt.support.breast-implant has a team of professional corporate
PR people who highjack every thread for their own purposes.

I want to talk about breast implants ... they want to talk about
popcorn.

I want to talk about breast implants ... they want to push the War
some more.

Sorry ... certainly wasn't meant for you ... In fact, I very much
wanted to thank you for your very intelligent comments last week about
platinum in breast implants ...

What you said was right on ...

Sorry that thread got highjacked too.

Unfortunately, the silicone issue is enormous ... far greater than
just breast implants, and the industry hired Burson Marsteller PR Team
which funnels corporate PR money to junkscience.com / ACSH and all
their quacky frontgroups here on Usenet.

Here they are together:

www.humanticsfoundation.com/andysposse.htm

Thanks again for your wisdom about the women's breasts on the previous
thread ...

Best regards,
Ilena
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org
Mary Fisher - 04 Sep 2004 23:54 GMT
> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
> >> amongst the garbage posted here.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> alt.support.breast-implant has a team of professional corporate
> PR people who highjack every thread for their own purposes.

But none of what you say doesn't mean that posts should be cross posted to
alt.support.cance.breast.

Mary
Ilena Rose - 05 Sep 2004 01:37 GMT
>> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
>> >> amongst the garbage posted here.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
>Mary

Around 20 percent of the breast implants sold are to post mastectomy
patients.

In fact, they have never been restricted at all to this population.

I have met several women who are now in my emai support group through
this newsgroup and continue to believe that it is a relevant topic.

Most women with breast cancer have a choice to buy implants ... or
not.

Information such as this one on Negative  Effect of Povidone Iodine on
Silicone Gel Breast Implants is quite relevant.

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org
Mary Fisher - 05 Sep 2004 08:23 GMT
> >> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
> >> >> amongst the garbage posted here.
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> Around 20 percent of the breast implants sold are to post mastectomy
> patients.

<snip>

That still doesn't tell us which groups post garbage.

Mary

> In fact, they have never been restricted at all to this population.
Ilena Rose - 05 Sep 2004 14:20 GMT
>That still doesn't tell us which groups post garbage.

Thought I had clarified that ... sorry ... it's this Team on
alt.support.breast-implant

www.humanticsfoundation.com/andysposse.htm
Coleah - 05 Sep 2004 04:17 GMT
>> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
>> >> amongst the garbage posted here.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Mary
==================

Ilena posted the original post of the subject line (above) to all newsgroups
(above):
8/26/2004 at 10:31AM
8/26/2004 at 4:34PM
8/30/2004 at 12:35PM

She made the very same post to alt.support.breast-implant
8/26/2004 at 10:31AM
8/26/2004 at  4:34PM
8/27/2004 at 4:14PM
8/27/2004 at 6:31PM
8/27/2004 at 7:13PM
8/30/2004 at 12:35PM

And she has the guts to say something like this:
>> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
>> >> amongst the garbage posted here.
Mary Fisher - 05 Sep 2004 08:23 GMT
> >> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
> >> >> amongst the garbage posted here.
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> >> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this lost
> >> >> amongst the garbage posted here.

and I have the guts to ask which group posts garbage.
Coleah - 05 Sep 2004 08:56 GMT
>> >> >> ~~~ Thanks Kathi ... very important article ... don't want this
>> >> >> lost
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
>
> and I have the guts to ask which group posts garbage.

That would be a question for Ilena.......................
Andrew Heenan - 05 Sep 2004 10:19 GMT
"Coleah" wrote > Ilena posted the original post of the subject line (above)
to all newsgroups
> (above):
> 8/26/2004 at 10:31AM
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> 8/27/2004 at 7:13PM
> 8/30/2004 at 12:35PM

And YOU crossposted it across the whole universe!

Duh!
Coleah - 05 Sep 2004 16:03 GMT
> "Coleah" wrote > Ilena posted the original post of the subject line
> (above)
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> Duh!
==============

Well, Mary asked where the garbage came from.
Any more questions??
Mary Fisher - 05 Sep 2004 16:11 GMT
> ==============
>
> Well, Mary asked where the garbage came from.

Not quite. I asked:

"Can I ask which newsgroup you think posts garbage?"

In response to Ilena:

" ... don't want this lost amongst the garbage posted here."

Mary
Tim Jackson - 05 Sep 2004 00:33 GMT
> >Can I ask which newsgroup you think posts garbage?
>
> Sorry ... certainly wasn't meant for you ...

Ilena, can you use a "followup-to" header like this one (but pointing to
your prime newsgroup)?
I don't know how easy that is using Forte, I've never used it.

It should mean that responses using the default headers don't get
cross-posted to all and sundry.

Your posts are of interest to a minority on alt.support.cancer.breast and
others, but the followups you get are almost invariably off-topic to most.
If  you can do this it would help reduce the quantity of off-topic posts we
get, while still allowing interested readers to respond in an appropriate
forum.

Thank you

Tim Jackson
Andrew Heenan - 05 Sep 2004 10:17 GMT
> Your posts are of interest to a minority on alt.support.cancer.breast and
> others, but the followups you get are almost invariably off-topic to most.
> If  you can do this it would help reduce the quantity of off-topic posts we
> get, while still allowing interested readers to respond in an appropriate
> forum.

And of zero interest to all the other groups.

best to post to ONE group only - that way you get to see the responses
(sensible responders will only respond in their group).

And you DON'T WASTE EVERYBODY's TIME

Thanks!
Guess Who - 05 Sep 2004 14:11 GMT
Yes, Ilena, I find your post of no support, PLEASE do not cross post, we all
by now know if we have any concerns about implants where your group is. It
is self defeating to alienate the group you are trying to give support? Now
I am finding your cross posting disrespectful and poor netiquette
Alex

>> >Can I ask which newsgroup you think posts garbage?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Tim Jackson
Andrew Heenan - 05 Sep 2004 10:13 GMT
> Can I ask which newsgroup you think posts garbage?

When people cross-post to all manner of groups, it's loical that a sensible
post in one group is garbage in another.

One good reason to avoid crossposting?

A
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.